Magnolia Manor Senior Living

Legal name: Magnolia Manor Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
580911706
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Americus, GA, US
Phone
229.931.5925
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Supportive Housing for Older Adults

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$42,386,688
Expenses
$39,320,136
Assets
$78,373,922
Liabilities
$44,118,753

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

25 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Hillery Fort (CEO, President effective 10/1/24)
  • Mark Todd (CEO, President 07/1/24 - 9/30/24)

Highest reported compensation

  • Mark Todd (CEO, President 07/1/24 - 9/30/24): $560,024 total reported compensation
  • Hillery Fort (CEO, President effective 10/1/24): $334,238 total reported compensation
  • David Charter (COO): $243,549 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Magnolia Manor is a faith-based, tax-exempt, not-for-profit organization affiliated by covenant with the South Georgia Conference of the United Methodist Church. Services at our nine locations are open to all persons, regardless of denominational affiliation. We provide various levels of senior living and care.

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization provides residential services to the sick and aged in a spiritual setting. The organization provides these services through the operation and long-term care and assisted and independent living facilities. The organization operates 268 long-term skilled nursing beds and approximately 600 assisted living and independent living beds in several facilities throughout the state of Georgia.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 94% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - Most voting board members are independent and program spending has grown recently. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 47
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 54
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 66.1%; rating input score 66
  • Program expense ratio: 63.7%; rating input score 64
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 7.2%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.99; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.56; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.2%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 8 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 66.1% of revenue deployed · 63.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $25.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $560K · 25 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.1M reported
  • Consistency: 36 of 37 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 11 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 11 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 8 filed related-organization links
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 25/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 41/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.